Recently, we’ve litigated several mesothelioma cases involving men who were exposed to asbestos while serving in the Navy.  Asbestos products were used extensively in Navy ship  systems from 1940s through the 1970s.  Pumps, boilers, turbines, engines, motors, gaskets, valves, packing, fireproofing, and flame retardants all typically contained asbestos and service men and women that served during these years, either on the ships or in shipyards, had a risk of being exposed to some level of asbestos.

The Navy asbestos exposure clients we’ve represented were never warned during their service that exposure causes a host of asbestos-related conditions, including the deadly disease, malignant mesothelioma.

Today, it is increasingly difficult for manufacturers to argue that they weren’t aware that asbestos was dangerous – a tactic they leaned heavily on for the first years of mesothelioma litigation.  This difficulty stems from the large number of cases throughout the country that have proven that knowledge of the danger was widespread and widely covered up throughout the industry.  We have established that manufacturers saw that they were making huge profits from their asbestos products and made the decision that profit was more important than protecting human life.

In the Navy asbestos exposure cases we’ve litigated recently, defendants have taken a different approach: blame the Navy.  During trial, they argue that it is the Navy’s fault that these men and women were exposed to asbestos. They argue that the Navy knew about the dangers of asbestos and controlled the working environment of the sailors.

In representing our clients, one of the biggest flaws our mesothelioma attorneys have demonstrated against the argument above is the fact that the Navy actually relied on the product manufacturers to warn about the dangers of the products that they made and sold to the Navy.  Navy specifications actually required manufacturers to place warnings on their products, but these companies ignored those requirements. In addition, most of these manufacturers also produced the identical products for commercial use and never warned those commercial customers about the dangers of asbestos either.  The truth is, they were negligent and didn’t warn either military users or commercial users because it would negatively impact sales.  They pretend they are the victims of the Navy’s negligence.

At SEGLaw, our extensive experience with mesothelioma cases has made us extremely familiar with the defenses typically argued by asbestos product manufacturers.  We’re also skilled in out-maneuvering unusual or new defenses these defendants desperately try to use to escape responsibility for their negligent actions.  We take great pride in the settlements we’ve negotiated and verdicts we’ve won for our clients, the real victims.